Jump to content

User talk:Coronadarc

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Welcome!

[edit]

Hello, Coronadarc, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions, especially your edits to Assyrian Neo-Aramaic. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:

You may also want to complete the Wikipedia Adventure, an interactive tour that will help you learn the basics of editing Wikipedia. You can visit the Teahouse to ask questions or seek help.

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask for help on your talk page, and a volunteer should respond shortly. Again, welcome! –MJL ‐Talk‐☖ 02:35, 15 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  • Thank you, but an admin has abused their privilege and blocked me because of what one of their friends said on here, which is completely unprofessional on behalf of both the admin and editor. (Also thanks for the signing instruction, I did not know how to do it before.) Coronadarc (talk) 23:25, 18 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Of course! If you ever need help, just ping me. –MJL ‐Talk‐☖ 05:19, 19 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
lol, I'll try to do that XD, I'm not the most tech savvy.. Coronadarc (talk) 08:45, 19 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

July 2019

[edit]
This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Coronadarc (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Why am I blocked and who is Meganesia?

Decline reason:

Please see above. Please also read WP:GAB to understand how to write an unblock request. Yamla (talk) 20:34, 15 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Coronadarc (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Since this is apparently what got me blocked, I will respond to all of these. # - Puduḫepa has created a narrative about me being someone else because she didn't approve of the edits. # - She didn't link what I edited on the prunus page (which was removing foreign language text from an English page), because it doesn't fit the narrative she's establishing of me being someone else. The citations she provided above include: * a link to a page that was merged with another, so I removed the duplicate text (she cited it twice) * the changing of Middle East to West Asia which isn't wrong (she cited it three times, possibly to look like more was done) * removal of foreign languages that should've been reverted whenever they were originally added. I created a talk post on as well * additional citations of Meganesia as if I am that person * she further reverted an "edit war" post of mine that I cited and had a talk post on In addition, she responded rudely to the talk discussion I created about the validity of Semitic people being a proper people descriptor, when she has never interacted with me before. I am blocked for being misportrayed as someone else which is not fair and of good will. I have created talk posts and cited my changes too. If there is anything I need to do additionally that I'm unaware of, please let me know.

Decline reason:

Coronadarc is  Likely Nemroyo. For any cu that might review in the future see my finding here to track in the cu log. This is now a checkuser block.
 — Berean Hunter (talk) 17:05, 19 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

  • Checkuser needed. Can this account be checked to Meganesia? Vanjagenije (talk) 17:03, 18 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment. So... worst case scenario our new friend Coronadarc here has learned not to block evade. If Coronadarc says they won't edit while logged out again (or in the future if the IP wasn't them), that honestly should be good enough to warrant an unblock. As one of the few editors in this exact topic area, I have the most to lose of Coronadarc screws up; but I am not seeing anything that is giving me super pause to think they can't be trusted with editing privileges.
    That said, on an unrelated note... Coronadarc, I'd appreciate less of this lol. Generally, that goes against the spirit of WP:BRD.
    @Fut.Perf.: Could you please re-review your block in light of the checkuser evidence exonerating Coronadarc? It was a good block at the time, but I don't know about it now with these new facts. Cheers! –MJL ‐Talk‐☖ 05:19, 19 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
      • fair enough and I'll abide by the wiki rules regarding such and communicating with you more (I still am not sure how it works as far as communicating and moderation here), but I'd still like to point out the Future Perfect and Puduḫepa are again commenting at the same time, and in the case of Puduḫepa, pretending they are the victim when they (Puduḫepa) deliberately created a narrative about me to get me blocked. Like, is there no recourse for this extremely obtuse behavior? I've already contacted Wikipedia about this because it is a clear case of not only bias, but discrimination and suppression of freedom of speech (Future Perfect did not check any of those cited links, which is obvious when not being able to discern an American from an Australian or that most of them are duplicates of the same thing). As I pointed out in my original complaint and Future Perfect is trying to deflect to now, I created a talk post[1] regarding this and was treated rather poorly. Sorry for the soapbox, but this has been a rather awful experience for me, I'm annoyed, and still blocked for whatever reason. Coronadarc (talk) 08:37, 19 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
      • also, I'd like to point out the time difference between when I made that talk post, Puduḫepa reporting me to Future Sunrise for "being" Meganesia, and Future Perfect blocking me. Just for anyone who has any democratic values. Coronadarc (talk) 08:53, 19 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    • I may well have gotten the sockmaster wrong. This area has been swamped with socks for years, with every sockmaster following subtly different ideological agendas that are difficult to distinguish to the outsider. What convinced me at the time was the identical edits removing "Semitic people", and the apparent shared interest in the alternative topic of plant species (see Coronadarc's very first edits). If this is not Meganesia, another candidate might be User:Nemroyo; with them, they share the agenda of removing or downgrading Chaldean Neo-Aramaic (disclosure: I had some input from User:Puduḫepa analysing this). In any case, I'd still say it's overwhelmingly likely this is a returning sock of someone, but I'll leave it to other admins to determine if they want to give them the benefit of the doubt. Fut.Perf. ☼ 06:23, 19 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
      • You are just sharing what Puduḫepa told you (as seen by what she sourced on your talk page, what I quoted here, and what you are referencing now, if you and her are not in fact the same person as her). I do not spend my freetime caring about plant species (tho the environment is very important) and I explained above why I edited it (and why Puduḫepa did not source it for you to view, which you didn't check any of her "sources" anyway). I do not mean to be partaken as hostile, but this warrants objection. Coronadarc (talk) 09:09, 19 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • This is borderline personal attack targeting Future Perfect at Sunrise. Puduḫepa 07:51, 19 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    • if you are not reprimanded for your inexcusable behavior, you are exactly why countries block Wikipedia. I feel no sympathy for someone that tries to frame someone and manipulate another. Coronadarc (talk) 09:13, 19 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Wikipedia's technical logs indicate that this user account has been or may be used abusively. It has been blocked indefinitely from editing to prevent abuse.
Note that multiple accounts are allowed, but not for illegitimate reasons, and any contributions made while evading blocks or bans may be reverted or deleted.
If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you should review the guide to appealing blocks, and then appeal your block by adding the following text below this notice: {{unblock|Your reason here ~~~~}}. Note that anything you post in your unblock request will be public, so you may alternatively use the Unblock Ticket Request System to submit an appeal if it contains information that must be private.
Administrators: Checkusers have access to confidential system logs not accessible by the public or by administrators due to the Wikimedia Foundation's privacy policy. You must not loosen or remove this block, or issue an IP block exemption, without consulting with a checkuser or the Arbitration Committee. Administrators who undo checkuser blocks without permission from a checkuser or the Arbitration Committee may be summarily desysopped.

 — Berean Hunter (talk) 17:01, 19 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

April 2020

[edit]
This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Coronadarc (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Hello, I’d like to be unblocked and not have my timeframe extended without warrant as Berean Hunter has been doing. Is there another moderator for this area? Thanks. Coronadarc (talk) 14:01, 30 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

I am declining your unblock request because it does not address the reason for your block, or because it is inadequate for other reasons. To be unblocked, you must convince the reviewing administrator(s) that

  • the block is not necessary to prevent damage or disruption to Wikipedia, or
  • the block is no longer necessary because you
    1. understand what you have been blocked for,
    2. will not continue to cause damage or disruption, and
    3. will make useful contributions instead.

Please read the guide to appealing blocks for more information. Yamla (talk) 14:33, 30 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

  1. ^ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Assyrian_people#Semitic_people. {{cite web}}: Cite has empty unknown parameter: |dead-url= (help); Missing or empty |title= (help)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Coronadarc&oldid=954241672"